The WoodenBoat Forum is sponsored by WoodenBoat Publications, publisher of WoodenBoat magazine. The Forum is a free service, and much like the "free" content on Public Radio, we hope you will support WoodenBoat by subscribing to this fabulous magazine. To get WoodenBoat delivered to your door or computer, mobile device of choice, etc, click WB Subscriptions.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ. You'll find answers to the frequently asked questions as well as basic rules. No need to register unless you would like to participate, although some images will only show if you are registered/logged-in.

You will need to register
before you can post: click the red register link or the register tab, above, right.

Selling/self promotion postings are verboten on the Forum. To advertise, take a look at WoodenBoat Advertising, or use your Google Adwords account if you want to advertise on the Forum.

Re: deputizing the military?

I for one don’t have an issue with the US military guarding the border. I’d rather have them doing that than stirring up $hit in Iran, Syria, Venezuela or any other foreign nation. In fact I’d like to see ALL US military members and assets recalled within the US to provide security for THIS nation. Let the others fend for themselves.

However having them travel inwards from the border to conduct missions to round up and apprehend illegals is another matter as American citizens will undoubtedly get mistakingly targeted by uneducated, untrained and heavily armed individuals.
Guarding a line in the dirt is one thing, acting as a police force is another.

Re: deputizing the military?

Originally Posted by Reynard38

I for one don’t have an issue with the US military guarding the border. I’d rather have them doing that than stirring up $hit in Iran, Syria, Venezuela or any other foreign nation. In fact I’d like to see ALL US military members and assets recalled within the US to provide security for THIS nation. Let the others fend for themselves.

However having them travel inwards from the border to conduct missions to round up and apprehend illegals is another matter as American citizens will undoubtedly get mistakingly targeted by uneducated, untrained and heavily armed individuals.
Guarding a line in the dirt is one thing, acting as a police force is another.

I, for one, have a HUGE problem with the US military enforcing civilian law.

This is a MAJOR step toward the imposition of martial law.

I'll say it again: With all the investigations and the general sleaze combined with the toadying to every, single despot on the planet and the fact that being 'President' is the only thing between Donald F Trump's continued spitshow and dying in prison, his only rational choice is to impose martial law, dissolve the House (he'll leave the Senate), and declare himself Dictator for Life.

If he does not pull a coup, he will die in prison.

If he does not pull a coup, McConnell et al will die in prison.

Because he is completely amoral and solipsistic, his only rational choice is to pull a coup.

The US Constitution seems to be rapidly approaching the curious position where the only thing that will save her is a military coup.

If the military leadership take their oaths to defend her against all enemies, foreign and domestic, they will arrest that scumbag, and render him to Guantanamo, then suppress the civil unrest of the pinhead bursteds who believe Trump is their Messiah.

IMO, THERE IS NO LONGER ANY PATH OUT OF THIS MESS THAT DOES NOT INVOLVE CIVIL WAR.

Re: deputizing the military?

Originally Posted by Reynard38

I for one don’t have an issue with the US military guarding the border. I’d rather have them doing that than stirring up $hit in Iran, Syria, Venezuela or any other foreign nation. In fact I’d like to see ALL US military members and assets recalled within the US to provide security for THIS nation. Let the others fend for themselves.

However having them travel inwards from the border to conduct missions to round up and apprehend illegals is another matter as American citizens will undoubtedly get mistakingly targeted by uneducated, untrained and heavily armed individuals.
Guarding a line in the dirt is one thing, acting as a police force is another.

I tend to agree, however, Border Patrol officers are just one "fraction slightly better" group of highly armed, uneducated, not properly trained folks recruited from the same troops you speak of. So it's a wash.

Re: deputizing the military?

Oznabrag is right. Deputizing the military is a bad idea, and in the current circumstances, could be catastrophic.

As for the Insurrection Act, mentioned in the article :

The Insurrection Act allows the deployment of federal troops “whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.”

The United State has had decades to improve "the ordinary course of judicial proceedings" to the point where it is "practicable to enforce the laws of the United States". The consequences of the failure to do so do not amount to an "insurrection". That would be like closing the courts and then declaring martial law because crime was going unpunished.

The President is a branch of government in himself. -- Jay Sekulow
Hitler took great care to give his dictatorship the appearance of legal sanction. -- wikipedia

Re: deputizing the military?

silly TV quote

"There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."

Re: deputizing the military?

Originally Posted by Jim Bow

The duty of the military is to kill the people they are ordered to kill.

The weird thing is that the Border patrol are not Police or Military. Their command structure and mission are different, but here in Washington, they sometimes respond to 911 Police calls with local Law Enforcement.

Re: deputizing the military?

From the very start, the US military has a tradition of NOT involving itself with the political addairs of the USA. Even the wisest figures in US military history, Washington himself, or Marshal, even Eisenhower, (notice I did not include McArthur) would consider long and extremely carefully before moving against their "Commander In Chief".

Originally Posted by oznabrag

I, for one, have a HUGE problem with the US military enforcing civilian law.

This is a MAJOR step toward the imposition of martial law.

I'll say it again: With all the investigations and the general sleaze combined with the toadying to every, single despot on the planet and the fact that being 'President' is the only thing between Donald F Trump's continued spitshow and dying in prison, his only rational choice is to impose martial law, dissolve the House (he'll leave the Senate), and declare himself Dictator for Life.

If he does not pull a coup, he will die in prison.

If he does not pull a coup, McConnell et al will die in prison.

Because he is completely amoral and solipsistic, his only rational choice is to pull a coup.

The US Constitution seems to be rapidly approaching the curious position where the only thing that will save her is a military coup.

If the military leadership take their oaths to defend her against all enemies, foreign and domestic, they will arrest that scumbag, and render him to Guantanamo, then suppress the civil unrest of the pinhead bursteds who believe Trump is their Messiah.

IMO, THERE IS NO LONGER ANY PATH OUT OF THIS MESS THAT DOES NOT INVOLVE CIVIL WAR.

Re: deputizing the military?

So we're headed for civil war? Then it's a good thing the 2nd Amendment and the NRA have been able to fight the attempts to disarm the public.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,.."

We have to have an military, but now that military may be used against us. So therefore...

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Because some day, you might have a civil war. Just ask Oznabrag.

Cause if you gonna have one, might as well have a gun.

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.”― Mark Twain,

Re: deputizing the military?

I know I didn't say there's going to be a civil war because of Trump.

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.”― Mark Twain,

Re: deputizing the military?

Originally Posted by CWSmith

Who do you picture fighting this war? Who is on the other side from you?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Somebody else.

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.”― Mark Twain,

Re: deputizing the military?

Well poop... you put smiley face in the beginning and the end of you post... how was I supposed to know you were serious?

Just to backtrack a bit, it was not me, but rather Oznabrag who says we're headed to a civil war. I simply commented that those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms.

Would I take up arms to defend Trump if he were to not respect the outcome of the next election? Certainly not.

Of course liberals have yet to accept the results of the last one. First thing they wanted to do was a recount. Now they want to dismantle the electoral college. Beyond that, it was an investigation for collusion which failed, so now they're trying other avenues to remove the elected President. Whatever... just admit your trying to circumvent an election.

No... I'm pretty sure any cause I thought necessary to take up arms over, you'd agree with me, and I with you. Where that line lies is a bit undefined now, but if we come across it, I'm sure we'll recognize it together.

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.”― Mark Twain,

Re: deputizing the military?

Originally Posted by BrianW

Well poop... you put smiley face in the beginning and the end of you post... how was I supposed to know you were serious?

Just to backtrack a bit, it was not me, but rather Oznabrag who says we're headed to a civil war. I simply commented that those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms.

Would I take up arms to defend Trump if he were to not respect the outcome of the next election? Certainly not.

Of course liberals have yet to accept the results of the last one. First thing they wanted to do was a recount. Now they want to dismantle the electoral college. Beyond that, it was an investigation for collusion which failed, so now they're trying other avenues to remove the elected President. Whatever... just admit your trying to circumvent an election.

No... I'm pretty sure any cause I thought necessary to take up arms over, you'd agree with me, and I with you. Where that line lies is a bit undefined now, but if we come across it, I'm sure we'll recognize it together.

Who said anything about taking up arms against the government?

The elected 'President' has been engaged in obstruction of justice since the moment he took office.

I suppose you are willfully ignorant of the fact that nobody seems to know what is going on with the national security investigations into Trump.

I suppose you are willfully ignorant of the fact that Trump's 'charity' has been shut down for fraudulent self-dealing.

Re: deputizing the military?

"I simply commented that those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms."
RW self-delusions at work. donald and his party would have the support of those likely to 'take up arms'.
They have been demonising the supposed 'left' for being a threat to the Constitution, the Republic and the nation when in reality the ideological hard right, the selective religionists, the bribed and power hungry and the gun lobbyists are the actual danger.

Re: deputizing the military?

OK - so this sounds completely over the top - which I believe is what Brian is pointing out.

So - in this day & age, how does one tell what we really need to worry about? A few years ago, the concept of worrying about the military acting as police would've been absolutely laughable - except for a few tinfoil headgear wearers.

Now? I just don't know. Once upon a time, I'd have said that congress & the courts wouldn't allow it. Not anymore - McConnell & his lackeys seem hellbent on letting Trump do anything he pleases - rule of law be damned.

Re: deputizing the military?

Originally Posted by Garret

OK - so this sounds completely over the top - which I believe is what Brian is pointing out.

So - in this day & age, how does one tell what we really need to worry about? A few years ago, the concept of worrying about the military acting as police would've been absolutely laughable - except for a few tinfoil headgear wearers.

Now? I just don't know. Once upon a time, I'd have said that congress & the courts wouldn't allow it. Not anymore - McConnell & his lackeys seem hellbent on letting Trump do anything he pleases - rule of law be damned.

A few years ago, Reagan got himself in hot water with a whole lot of people, including some Conservatives, who were outraged and horrified that he was using military personnel to enforce drug laws.

Re: deputizing the military?

Originally Posted by Garret

OK - so this sounds completely over the top - which I believe is what Brian is pointing out.

So - in this day & age, how does one tell what we really need to worry about? A few years ago, the concept of worrying about the military acting as police would've been absolutely laughable - except for a few tinfoil headgear wearers.

Now? I just don't know. Once upon a time, I'd have said that congress & the courts wouldn't allow it. Not anymore - McConnell & his lackeys seem hellbent on letting Trump do anything he pleases - rule of law be damned.

Re: deputizing the military?

Originally Posted by BrianW

Well poop... you put smiley face in the beginning and the end of you post... how was I supposed to know you were serious?

Just to backtrack a bit, it was not me, but rather Oznabrag who says we're headed to a civil war. I simply commented that those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms.

Would I take up arms to defend Trump if he were to not respect the outcome of the next election? Certainly not.

Of course liberals have yet to accept the results of the last one. First thing they wanted to do was a recount. Now they want to dismantle the electoral college. Beyond that, it was an investigation for collusion which failed, so now they're trying other avenues to remove the elected President. Whatever... just admit your trying to circumvent an election.

No... I'm pretty sure any cause I thought necessary to take up arms over, you'd agree with me, and I with you. Where that line lies is a bit undefined now, but if we come across it, I'm sure we'll recognize it together.

Once again: Who said anything about taking up arms against the government?

Taking up arms against the government is known as a 'revolution'.

When the citizens of a nation become so bitterly divided against one another that the people on Maple Street go over to Hickory Lane and kill everybody, that's a civil war.

It may interest you to know that our US Civil War was just baby poop compared to the modern version.

It probably doesn't interest you to know, though.

You seem quite happy in your ignorance.

It gives you a warm and fuzzy comfort zone from which to ridicule that which you refuse to understand.

I know from long experience that it is pointless to ask you any sort of meaningful question, but I would like to know what you mean by this statement:

those who may intend to take up arms against their government should be grateful for the NRA's support of their right to own said arms. Would I take up arms to defend Trump if he were to not respect the outcome of the next election? Certainly not.

I ask, because your position seems to be a little muddled.

It is crystal clear, to me anyway, that those who would take up arms to defend Donald Trump were he not to respect the outcome of the next election, would be committing Treason of the first order, yet you think they should be grateful to the Constitution they would be actively destroying.

Re: deputizing the military?

Nah - Brian is just having fun yanking chains & he's turned on a few lights by doing so!

Heck, I said I wouldn't support Trump if he refuses to step down in 2020, and oznabrag still went nuts enough to quote my post twice, and reply to it twice.

Guess I'm doing something right.

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.”― Mark Twain,